We are not being told everything about the London terror attacks and, just like 9/11, contradictions and anomalies are appearing in the official account. We look back and try to fathom what really happened?

Housed in a warehouse in Ica, Peru, is a collection of ancient stone tablets which carry pictures portraying advanced medical practice. They open a Pandora’s box of questions and challenge everything we have been taught about our past

A Short History of the New World Order Part II By cyberpatriot@hotmail.com Aug. 10, 1973 – David Rockefeller writes an article for the “New York Times” describing his recent visit to Red China: “Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also […]

“I firmly believe that there exist documents held by the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) that would yield important new evidence into the cause and circumstances leading to the death of the Princess of Wales.”

News Commentary — May 23, 2013

Rather than blame Britain’s Foreign policies, or the huge influx of immigrants into the country in recent years or even just the “War on Terror”, a new culprit is being cited for Tuesday’s horrific eventsin Woolwich.

Various “experts” have already been quoted claiming the Internet was involved.

According to Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens for the Study of Radicalisation at King’s College London, the two killers were probably acting alone:

“I think it’s most likely they became radicalised through the Internet…”

She was echoed by Margaret Gilmore of the United Services Institute:

“I think it has been easier for our intelligence services to track people who have been radicalised through known terror groups or followed certain paths,” Gilmore said.

“But it’s rather more difficult when you get people who have become radicalised through the Internet”. From what I know I would not be surprised if these people had not crossed the radar of the security services”.

However, the security services did indeed already know of the main culprit involved in the Woolwich attack, as they have in so many recent terror outrages.Although it appears that neither he nor his accomplice was considered an immediate threat.

The two British men of Nigerian descent who carried out the attack are thought to have done so in revenge for wars in Muslim countries.

After first running down the victim in a motor vehicle, the two then launched into a frenzied attack on the fallen man.

One man, filmed calmly justifying the killing as he stood by the body holding a knife and meat cleaver in bloodied hands, was named by acquaintances as 28-year-old Londoner Michael Adebolajo — a British-born convert to radical Islam.

DAYLIGHT ATTACK

The dramatic clip filmed by an onlooker showed Michael Adebolajo justifying the attack on religious grounds:

“We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you. The only reason we have done this is because Muslims are dying every day,” he said. “This British soldier is an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.”

The attack has revived speculation in the corporate media about “lone wolves”. Individual Muslim militants who may have had no direct ties with recognised terror groups but are inspired by radical preachers and by militant Islamic websites.

Whatever ultimately transpires, in the wake of Tuesday’s attack we can expect more calls for a clampdown on the Internet.